{"id":291233,"date":"2025-11-14T14:01:13","date_gmt":"2025-11-14T14:01:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/291233\/"},"modified":"2025-11-14T14:01:13","modified_gmt":"2025-11-14T14:01:13","slug":"arsenal-still-clear-at-the-top-villa-spurs-and-sunderland-fighting-relegation-where-do-premier-league-teams-deserve-to-be","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/291233\/","title":{"rendered":"Arsenal Still Clear at the Top, Villa, Spurs and Sunderland Fighting Relegation: Where Do Premier League Teams ‘Deserve’ to Be?"},"content":{"rendered":"

We take a look at the
\nexpected points data for every Premier
\nLeague<\/a> team in 2025-26 to see if there is more to the current
\nleague table than meets the eye.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s often said that no attention should be paid to the league
\ntable until at least 10 games into a season.<\/p>\n

Well, now 11 games into 2025-26 in the Premier League, we can
\nthen read into what the current table tells us.<\/p>\n

After all, in 11 of the last 20 Premier League seasons, the team
\nwho is top of the table at this stage has gone on to win the title
\n(55%). Teams often tend to be in roughly the position they will end
\nthe season.<\/p>\n

However, there are plenty of exceptions; more than enough to
\nconclude with absolute certainty that nothing should be taken for
\ngranted just yet.<\/p>\n

Last season, for example, Crystal
\nPalace<\/a> were 18th after 11 games but finished 12th. Spurs were
\n10th at this stage, three points off third, but finished 17th, 33
\npoints behind third place.<\/p>\n

Perhaps then, underlying data can provide a more accurate
\nindicator of each team\u2019s prospects for the season. There is more to
\nthe Premier League table than meets the eye.<\/p>\n

There are limitations to any table at this stage of the season,
\nnot least because although 11 games is a significant number of
\nmatches, it is only a small portion of the full season. Everyone
\nhas played a different combination of 11 of a possible 19
\nopponents, so points totals or underlying numbers aren\u2019t directly
\ncomparable. If one team have played the 11 most difficult games of
\nthe season, they could quite reasonably be faring worse in actual
\nresults as well as their underlying data than a team who have
\nplayed 11 easiest opponents. Only at the 38-game mark is the table
\ntruly fair (or as fair as it will ever be).<\/p>\n

But that said, the underlying data behind performances can still
\ntell a story. Expected
\ngoals<\/a> numbers can give a better reflection of how accurately
\nevery team\u2019s points total reflects their displays.<\/p>\n

Opta\u2019s expected points model uses expected goals data to do just
\nthat, by calculating the number of goals each team \u2018should\u2019 have
\nscored in a match based on the xG values of their shots. It then
\nuses that shot data to simulate the match 10,000 times, and each
\nteam\u2019s expected points are taken from the proportion of those
\nsimulations that the match is won, drawn and lost. As real goals
\nare so rarely scored, expected points is a way of rewarding teams
\nfor creating good chances and dominating games when they might not
\nactually find the back of the net.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not an exact science, because there is no xG value to
\nsustained periods of territorial dominance or chances that don\u2019t
\ninclude any actual attempt on goal. The model also doesn\u2019t consider
\ngame state (whether the game is being won\/drawn\/lost at any
\nparticular time), which can affect which of the teams show
\nattacking intent and create chances.<\/p>\n

But over an extended period \u2013 such as 11 games \u2013 it can be
\nilluminating, and the Premier
\nLeague expected points table<\/a> for 2025-26 is exactly that.<\/p>\n

\"Premier<\/p>\n

Arsenal<\/a>
\nlead the Premier League and deservedly so, according to the model,
\nwhich also has them in pole position. Their total of 24.1 xPts is
\nslightly lower than their actual total of 26, and so is their lead
\nover Manchester
\nCity<\/a> at the top, at 2.7 xPts rather than the four points they
\nlead by in reality.<\/p>\n

What the model says is that Arsenal have deserved to win roughly
\nas many points as they actually have; when they have won games,
\nthey have created enough chances to deserve to win. Indeed, they
\nhave won eight games and have won the xG battle in nine, but that
\nincludes their draw with City, when they essentially drew the xG
\nbattle with just 0.02 xG more than their opponents. Essentially,
\nArsenal have performed almost perfectly in line with their
\nunderlying data.<\/p>\n

City, in second, are the only other team who are in the same
\nposition in both the actual table and the xPts table, with their
\nperformances worthy of their position in the league, according to
\ntheir underlying data. However, there are big discrepancies
\nelsewhere.<\/p>\n

The teams currently in fourth (Sunderland<\/a>),
\nfifth (Tottenham<\/a>)
\nand sixth (Aston
\nVilla<\/a>) in the Premier League should actually be 15th, 16th and
\n19th based on the quality and quantity of chances they have created
\nand conceded. The underlying data behind their performances is far
\nworse than their results.<\/p>\n

For Spurs, whose fans are largely unhappy with the quality of
\nfootball they have seen under new manager Thomas Frank, this may
\nnot come as much of a surprise. There have been a few games this
\nseason in which Tottenham have appeared fortunate to get a result.
\nAside from a 3-0 win over Burnley in August, they haven\u2019t played
\nanyone off the park and don\u2019t tend to create much. The model
\nsuggests what they\u2019ve been doing \u2013 getting results without creating
\na great deal \u2013 doesn\u2019t make their league position sustainable and,
\nconcerningly for Spurs fans, that sounds about right.<\/p>\n

But for Sunderland, the xPts table feels unfair. Back in the top
\nflight after promotion last season, Regis Le Bris\u2019 side have been a
\nrevelation. Few would contend that they don\u2019t deserve to be where
\nthey are in the table.<\/p>\n

A possible explanation for their lowly position in the expected
\npoints table is that they spend long periods out of possession.
\nThey have averaged 43.2% possession this season and have had as
\nlittle as 28.6% vs Aston Villa and 31.7% vs Chelsea<\/a>.
\nWhen you have that little of the ball and \u2018suffer\u2019 as much as Le
\nBris\u2019 Sunderland, you are more likely to concede chances and \u2018lose\u2019
\nthe xG battle.<\/p>\n

But playing that way is precisely what makes this his team so
\neffective; it is almost by design that they have fewer chances than
\ntheir opponents, but they are brilliant at making the most of the
\nones they do get.<\/p>\n

At the other end, they have been able to rely on goalkeeper
\nRobin Roefs, who has prevented 2.1 goals based on the quality of
\nthe shots on target he has faced. He has been a decent part of the
\nreason Sunderland have one of the best defensive records in the
\nPremier League.<\/p>\n

\"Robin<\/p>\n

Villa\u2019s position is arguably the most shocking of the lot,
\nprobably because although they didn\u2019t have the best start to the
\nseason, their recovery feels like it has been enough to put them
\nhigher than second from bottom.<\/p>\n

Their underlying numbers aren\u2019t great, though. They failed to
\nscore in their first four games and then failed to beat 10-man
\nSunderland, and even in winning five of their next six matches,
\ntheir data isn\u2019t entirely convincing.<\/p>\n

Villa have managed better xG numbers than their opponents in
\njust three of their first 11 games. And that includes only just
\noutdoing Bournemouth<\/a>
\nin last week\u2019s 4-0 win, with 1.7 xG to their opponents\u2019 1.61,
\nsuggesting they were fortunate to come away with a scoreline that
\nlooked so convincing.<\/p>\n

\"Aston<\/p>\n

They also posted just 0.32 xG in last month\u2019s 2-1 win at Spurs,
\nand 0.81 xG to City\u2019s 1.18 when they beat Pep Guardiola\u2019s side,
\ntoo. The numbers suggest an improvement is needed for Villa to
\nmaintain their position.<\/p>\n

In a more positive light, the xPts model says plenty of teams
\ndeserve to be much higher up the table than they are.<\/p>\n

Crystal Palace are the other biggest movers: they are currently
\n10th but deserve to be third according to their underlying data.
\nThey have underperformed compared to their xG to a greater extent
\nthan any other team in the Premier League this season, scoring 14
\ngoals from 19.3 xG. Given they are just three points off third
\nplace, there\u2019s good reason to believe Oliver Glasner\u2019s side could
\nsoon rise up the table.<\/p>\n

\"Crystal<\/p>\n

Nottingham
\nForest<\/a> (currently 19th but \u2018should\u2019 be 13th), Leeds<\/a>
\n(16th, should be 10th), Newcastle<\/a>
\n(14th, should be ninth), Brentford (12th, should be seventh), and
\nBrighton (11th, should be sixth) are all also at least five
\npositions lower than their displays deserve. However, as the below
\ngraphic shows, Brentford and Brighton only deserve slightly more
\nthan they have got in points terms, and move up the xPts table in
\npart because so many other teams have dropped significantly.<\/p>\n

\"Premier<\/p>\n

In points terms,
\nWolves<\/a> are the biggest movers: they deserve 11.2 points,
\ncompared to the two they have. Things could turn for them soon
\nunder new manager Rob Edwards.<\/p>\n

Of course, there\u2019s no guarantee that the underlying data will
\ncome good. Sunderland, Spurs and Villa could easily carry on
\ndefying the numbers to challenge for a Champions League spot.
\nForest and Leeds might get involved a relegation scrap even though
\nthey deserve to be safe. Wolves might not win a game all
\nseason.<\/p>\n

Or, the pull of the underlying numbers will be too strong, and
\nthis exercise will prove prophetic. Either way, Arsenal look good
\nvalue for top spot.<\/p>\n


\n\"Premier<\/a><\/p>\n

Subscribe
\nto our\u00a0football
\nnewsletter<\/a>\u00a0to receive exclusive weekly content. You should
\nalso follow our social accounts over on\u00a0X<\/a>,\u00a0Instagram<\/a>,\u00a0TikTok<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Facebook<\/a>.<\/p>\n